Sadly, we do know Dick

Dick Cheney gave a farewell interview to Chris Wallace at Fox News (transcript). Others have written of his contempt in the interview for public opinion (“We’ve been here for eight years now. Eventually, you wear out your welcome in this business”) and his unique view of the balance of powers (Q. “If the president during war decides to do something to protect the country, is it legal?” A. “General proposition, I’d say yes.”).

Bu I found this particular part of the exchange of most interest. Wallace has raised the issue of the internment of suspected terrorists and the Bush Administration’s position that they did not need to have to have any sort of judicial review of their cases.

WALLACE: … but that’s not what the Supreme Court ended up saying.

CHENEY: They were not — this was the decision we made at the time based on the precedent that was available. They were not citizens of a state that had — was a party to the Geneva Convention.

They did not adhere to the laws of war. They spent all their time trying to kill civilians for their — achieve their political ends. They didn’t wear uniforms. I mean, by any definition that was available to us at the time, the Geneva Convention does not traditionally apply to terrorists.

WALLACE: Mr. Vice President, here’s — here’s my — here’s my…

CHENEY: Second — no, let me — let me finish.

WALLACE: Can I just ask — can I just ask this…

CHENEY: No.

WALLACE: … one question? Because I think it will — it will bring the point in. In the first big test case, which was against Usama bin Laden’s driver…

CHENEY: Right.

WALLACE: … Salim Hamdan, the military jury — in the end, the military jury ended up acquitting him of all the major charges against him.

The government asked for 30 years to life. The judge ended up deciding that he should be released based on time served. The question basically is this. Even the government can get things wrong sometimes.

CHENEY: So?

So? So? 

With that one word, Cheney betrays his authoritarian soul. If we deem is necessary, we can do whatever we want. If anyone suffers for it, that doesn’t change the equation. If we make a mistake … so? 

The purpose of Rule of Law, Not Men, is to help prevent mistakes at the whim or error of individuals. To provide a wisdom of masses (over time and at the moment) to rein in excesses and check ambitions and question and expose to the light what government, with its awesome power, is doing.

That Cheney doesn’t realize that … that he treats the mistakes of government so cavalierly … that he dismisses the difference between holding a man for years with every intent to keep in in prison for life, with a release with time served … that a fair review of why someone is being held by the government and the presumption that those apprehended can be presumed a guilty terrorist simply through their apprehension, until, maybe, someone gets around to deciding they are innocent … is simply appalling.

That one word, one syllable, two letters, should draw a chill of fear and then a cry of outrage from everyone in this country who dares call themselves a patriot.